"It's a shame he's leaving, Glenn. You never quite got around to insisting on knowing exactly who he is and what his credentials are."

"Mike posted some quotes from Alan that Glenn seemed not to like. Instead of countering Alan's statements, Glenn insisted on Alan's full name and curriculum vitae, things he never demanded of IALEM.

Funny, No I didn't, but then again I wasn't the one arguing with him, either. I have no idea who he was except what he stated as a specialty: Roman Archaeology. It is a shame they both left, but people in other disciplines should perhaps think twice before jumping into genetic genealogy battles.

My point stands! This is not the archaeology industry. They obviously have a disagreement within their own industry that needs or requires attention. This is genetic genealogy. Insisting on archaeological answers may not be the best way forward in this industry. The genetic genealogy field should be open to everyone; however, specialists in other fields must provide something more than a re-hashing of their own industry arguments.

We do have a right to know who we are dealing with, and if you believe your archaeology expertise is valid perhaps you should have insisted on reviewing his professional repertoire to gain more information in your challenge of his ideas.

I have always liked you Richard, but you do appear a little obsessed with the whole R-L21 has a different path phenomenon.

Sorry for the troubles, but that is to be expected in this industry.

You never challenged Alan's ideas, Glenn. You simply demanded his ID and his resume. Honestly, it was bizarre.

As for my "obsession", I don't think you know what you're talking about.

A "different path" from what or whom? Who has established the "path" of L21 so that I might be said to be offering something "different"?

What I generally post here is news about who has gone L21+ and where his ancestor came from. Otherwise, I have posted the views of Henri Hubert, Myles Dillon, and Nora Chadwick on the Beaker Folk and the arrival of the earliest Celts in the British Isles. Were the Beaker Folk L21+? Heck if I know! But it's a possibility they were. That's the best explanation or "path" I can think of right now, and the idea didn't originate with me; it was suggested to me by Rick Arnold, who recommended Hubert's book to me after he read it.

"Genetic Genealogy requires input from multiple disciplines, because it can only be understood in context of other disciplines, be they archeology, anthropology, history, biology, physics, mathematics, chemistry, and so forth. To eschew one in favor of another is nothing more than narrow-minded idiocy,"

My focus is genetic genealogy. It is not narrow minded to focus on a specific genealogy or the genetics of that genealogy. Your statement above is simply out of touch with reality. I'm supposed to consult "other disciplines, be they archeology, anthropology, history, biology, physics, mathematics, chemistry, and so forth" before I can study my own genealogical lineage. Every one of the WFN Surname projects must consult with all the above experts in those fields you mentioned before undertaking a genetic genealogical study.

“It seems possible that settlers from the European mainland sailed up the Irish Sea and around the Atlantic coast, settling in a number of separate locations,” McSparron says. A “significant element of colonisation must have been involved” in the beginnings of settled agriculture in Ireland."

Cormac McSparron Archaeology Ireland 22 No. 3: 18-21

I’m not an archaeologist, and have provided the above only as an example of possible Irish migration in the past.

"Genetic Genealogy requires input from multiple disciplines, because it can only be understood in context of other disciplines, be they archeology, anthropology, history, biology, physics, mathematics, chemistry, and so forth. To eschew one in favor of another is nothing more than narrow-minded idiocy,"

My focus is genetic genealogy. It is not narrow minded to focus on a specific genealogy or the genetics of that genealogy. Your statement above is simply out of touch with reality. I'm supposed to consult "other disciplines, be they archeology, anthropology, history, biology, physics, mathematics, chemistry, and so forth" before I can study my own genealogical lineage. Every one of the WFN Surname projects must consult with all the above experts in those fields you mentioned before undertaking a genetic genealogical study.